Esse est Percipi - ('To be is to be perceived')

If a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?
That's the kind of head-scratching question that's popularly believed to occupy the time and brains of philosophers.
It relates to the ideas of immaterialism proposed by Bishop George Berkeley who asserted that the only things that exist are minds and ideas in those minds.
Narrated by Aidan Turner. Scripted by Nigel Warburton.
From the BBC Radio 4 series about life's big questions - A History of Ideas.
This project is from the BBC in partnership with The Open University, the animations were created by Cognitive.

[@riceboy2104]

Damn i didnt know berkeleys name was Dr Ratio

[@PassePartoutiluvmonies]

There are two types of comments here : 1. People who legitimately wanted to learn 2. ESSE EST PERCIPI L+DR.RATIO

[@migsrebsaber]

Since Dr. Ratio is given for free until the end of the next version update, he is encouraging us to learn.

[@GachaLord]

3. Both

[@RP-dy5mu]

Both of those types of people wanted to legitimately learn what that phrase meant. Get off your high horse.

[@saturna1576]

Esse est percipi… Knowledge the measure of truth and falsehood! *L+DrRatio*

[@lesercraft]

THE WHOLE REASON WHY I SEARCHED UP THE VIDEO

[@nikethanapandian338]

samee@@lesercraft

[@ecilion3047]

i knew HSR fans would run towards this video when I heard his ult voiceline 😭😭

[@migsrebsaber]

Welcome to philosophy, fellow Trailblazers! Let Dr. Ratio teach us on this.

[@ЗапорозькийКочівник]

Same

[@ShoujoISMs]

DR RATIO MOMENT?!?!??!

[@ram_bruno]

*_"Knowledge is the measure of all things. It reveals truth.. and falsehood."_* Ratio, Doctor, 2023

[@DuoDingDong]

“Knowledge, the measure of truth…and falsehood”

[@bem3760]

My college teacher use to say this in the middle of the class. When I'm asking what's that means he then proceed to throw a big ass chalk to me follow up with "ZERO POINTS!" like, I'm just asking bruh.

[@ifuckinghatekafka]

Real and the teacher looks ngh

[@applepiss1969]

yeah one time my friend tried slipping him some cash and he legit just picked the dude up and threw him out the fucking window i haven't heard from him since so we had to throw a funeral for him

[@Xenomnipotent]

lil bro wants to be Dr. Ratio soo bad 😭💀

[@hella7799]

KNOWLEDGE! The MEASURE of TRUTH and FALSEHOOD!

[@Davidpoland2005]

the thing i like more than my lamborghini

[@ЗапорозькийКочівник]

How to understand that the One is playing on 2x speed

[@Existentialist946]

Contrary to the video, Berkeley didn't think the external world exists because God is perceiving it as such, rather he thought that the external world was a conception in God's mind which he conveyed to finite minds (us).

[@ЗапорозькийКочівник]

Based

[@whuforever8088]

Basically he was onto something then did a full 180 at the end lol

[@a5dr3]

WHU Forever I dont think he did say that about God. I've heard several philosophers say that he kind of implied it maybe, and and theists read into it. - It would make sense because he certainly defended Christianity and it would amount to an interesting apologetic for him.

[@Thindorama]

I mean. Hume does go all the way with the idea, and he is the more famous of the two for that.

[@joshualosoya3383]

This isn’t the most rigorous account of Berkeley. It’s a dumbed down and problematic secondary source. His justifications for what looks like a 180 is far more reasonable when presented in his own words and not a KZbin video less than 2 minutes long. But I agree that the narrator’s explanation of that “180” seems absurd.

[@tuduloo7799]

@@joshualosoya3383 where can one attain more information you are referring to

[@ЗапорозькийКочівник]

God is based

[@OoiJeeHao]

Knowledge is the measurement of all things. IT REVEALS TRUTH AND FALSEHOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@peterells1720]

This is an excellent summary of Berkeley. One thing that should also be mentioned is that Berkeley's system explains the consistency of our experiences (that when we put a book in a drawer, we will still find it there when we come to take it out later; and that people generally agree about their experiences of (say) conversing in a particular room together) by holding that the entire universe always exists as experiences in the mind of God.

[@aleksandravicus]

For Berkeley it was an easy shortcut to believe that God is perceiving book once it's put in a drawer. For an atheist it's also a matter of belief in matter that book is material and it substantiates itself once no one sees it. The truth is most likely our minds are too limited to understand what happens to things perceived once no one is perceiving them.

[@thomson2740]

@@aleksandravicus put a camera in drawer you will understand.

[@aleksandravicus]

The problem is that camera makes sense until there is anyone to use it, look through it etc, same like a book. Without the mind, all these things won't exist in such an arrangement we see / understand/ perceive them.

[@thomson2740]

@@aleksandravicus What about world 4 billion years ago? Did it exit while no living thing was observing?

[@aleksandravicus]

No it didn't, the world we see and understand today didn't exist billion years ago. For it to exist you should be able going back in time with your mind. And then creating this particular mode of reality there. The way to understand this I think is best by using multi-dimensional model of Universe. The mind reality is one dimension of the whole multi-dimensional reality. The reality did exist 4 billion years ago, yet the reality I and you live in today, didn't exist then. At least on earth.. @@thomson2740

[@mon33333]

Mind blowing, weird yet respectfully understandable. Shoutout Berkeley

[@thomasflii]

quickest summary of berkeley i have ever experienced

[@ellogabija]

this is a wonderful explanation.

[@chiknsld3856]

Indeed.

[@abbbble]

Knowledge is the measure of all things. It reveals truth... and falsehood

[@gerardlabeouf6075]

The illustration looked amazing

[@papashanko6877]

Please make more videos on philosophy

[@pape37]

Isn't it the case that at the time, Berkeley offered a prize to anyone who could refute this argument and it remains unclaimed to this day? Of course a proof that "matter" exists beyond perception would have to fall within perception, making a refutation impossible. Clever chap, this Berkeley.

[@ThePeterBLloyd]

No, he didn't. But he probably should have, if he'd be rich enough.

[@hodorthepolishpainter]

yes it's literally impossible to prove the existence of anything beyond and outside perception because any attempt to do so will be done through the mind

[@williamparrish2436]

@@hodorthepolishpainter And that's the point! Meanwhile the materialist argues for an objective world that he can't prove exists and everyone says he's the sane one haha! It is as if materialism is a religion of sorts...

[@thomson2740]

I would give him an LSD and tell him What is in God's' mind.

[@Donteatacowman]

Oh, makes me think of Scott McCloud! I wonder if he's seen this. I bet he'd be stoked about the format too. "The stone just was the experience" - Love this because it's not trying to describe objective reality, just the way we can't understand a stone outside of experience and thought. I also like the idea of God existing in a way that gives the world meaning and reality solely due to God's role as an onlooker--not because I believe it's true, but I haven't heard it before.

[@TeddehSpaghetti]

1:39 Actually, the universe is collectively God watching, perceiving and validating itself into existence vis-a-vis our sensory input (both desires, and agonies.)

[@chiflinator]

Spinozism

[@MiskyMBA]

There is no god

[@williamparrish2436]

@@MiskyMBA That is a positive statement that you cannot prove. It's like saying there are no unicorns. Does it even make sense as a statement? How can you deny the existence of something that has never existed lol?

[@Arkenaw10]

Greetings from honkai star rail

[@safra2000]

Without perception then nothing exists?! This is true perhaps if we restrict the meaning of existence in terms of an organism’s perception. Philosophically, existence could be there even in the absence of human perception.

[@rickyay26]

lol similar ideas to todays view on simulated universe. If it ain’t there, it hasn’t loaded yet.

[@RP-dy5mu]

A little bit different but to be honest it has more ground to stand on. Considering we can imagine the concept better when comparing it with how in computer games cameras can do object culling to save resources.

[@wafflestastegood3891]

@@RP-dy5mubro he is talking about a video game called honkai star rail 😭

[@AdamMiceli]

Not only does the tree not make a sound...but there is no tree, and there is no forest.

[@NikonKanava]

This was really helpful, thank you!

[@poseidon14t]

Does anyone know when Berkeley said this? Esse est percipi? Like some source. Did he write it? Did he say it verbally? Where does it come from

[@bondballer9928]

George Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, section 23

[@alternatives3379]

I feel bad now, knowing I had these thoughts and noted them down and felt nice for this "observation" (even though I actually thought about these for humans), and now I see I was some decades too late :(

[@anegage]

That's some weird ass philosophy that I still couldn't wrap my head around.

[@thomson2740]

Watch matrix.

[@haipengli4769]

To argue about existence, we need first to define what "exist" means. If you define "to exist is to be perceived", then it basically becomes circular reasoning.

[@2tehnik]

Berkeley didn't argue for idealism based on that definition though. He simply took Lockean empiricism and drove it to its logical conclusion.

[@Existentialist946]

For matter to exist, it means that it has actuality wholly independently of consciousness.

[@BlueSky-md2vo]

He doesn't believe in matter because he can't experience it so why believing in other mind that also can't be experienced?

[@hamzam11]

An important question, this is the answer : He (Berkeley) said that he has all the right to supposing other minds because he has an experience of at least one mind, ie, his own mind, so he didn't see any contradiction or absurdity in supposing Y as a (mind + different from his self) because he knew what a mind it is and knew what the word "different from his self" means. This is what we do when we believe that other people have thoughts and convictions even if they are not in the sphere of our own experience, we do the analogy and we suppose the possibility of other sensations or minds like our very own on the ground of our own experiences. The problem with matter is that we don't have any idea of some material substance as a ground to expand it afterward with suppositions and analogy. Ask yourself: if all people are blind, and someone tells us that he has an idea of something he calls color and he says in defining it: Color is not an idea of sound, or smoothness, or pain...how, can we, as a society of blind people, understand his declaration? we don't have any experience of anything like color and we don't have, as the result of this supposition, any idea of what a color is, so how can we understand his saying? For us, he just talks nonsense if we don't have sufficient reason to believe that he experience something totally different from what we have as blind people. Berkeley said: We, as humans, are like this blind society in relation to the fake idea of "matter" that some people try to push us to believe in its existence in our own mind while we don't find it when we do our inquiry about it. Now, I and Berkeley are not ill people, ie we don't have a mental or sensorial illness, and if people like us can't find or perceive any idea of this matter, like many great philosophers, how can this idea of matter exist in the mind of materialists people? I hope my answer helps you.

[@boboauyeung9408]

Really clear

[@izumihanagata1148]

Summary : Everything are just immaterial and mere ideas. Plain and simple.

[@RP-dy5mu]

*Because without us as individuals there to observe it, we can't have observed the opposite to be true. This is just a philosophical catch 22

[@thomson2740]

How does Berkeley define the transformation from 5 weeks old fetus ( idea ) to human ( mind ) ?

[@malevolentthedragon]

I came here to hear how to pronounce it.

[@monaelisa8713]

And I cringed when the narrator said "perkipi" (I'm used to it being pronounced [pertzipi], kind of like in the word "perCeption")

[@manuel5114]

@@monaelisa8713 But... perkipi is the right pronunciation, right?

[@monaelisa8713]

@@manuel5114 It's hard to define the "right" pronunciation of Latin since it's a dead language. So I guess some people could have learned to pronounce it [perkipi]. I didn't, so it sounded really weird when I heard it in the video.

[@TheEd0206]

So did Bishop Berkeley thought that he himself isn't a material and just an object of perception??

[@TheEd0206]

I see

[@tmonk88]

+Stevie Decided So, if the physical is immaterial, are you suggesting that spirits, minds, and rational agents are material? As in, the stuff "stuff"/everything is actually made up of??

[@Magnulus76]

@@tmonk88 Mental perceptions.

[@SoCoolScience]

If a tree burps in a forest will it fart too

[@daia5292]

being perceived is tiring

[@altnarrative]

It’s interesting because his immateriality seems echoed in quantum theory.

[@zortha3941]

I would definitely have to agree.

[@Zayden.]

Quantum theory is wrong. Check out pilot wave theory

[@bars9218]

Any transcript?

[@camuscoffee]

if the tree falls in a forest and no one is there to hear it, does it still make a sound?

[@williamparrish2436]

Well by definition sound is vibrating of the eardrum that is captured by a nervous system. So I'd say no.

[@bakalitetrick968]

Would Berkley have noted the a social aspect to perception, which is not purely sensory? This is how I normally perceive what is not actually there. Like this video, for instance.

[@albjuba]

m. buss I think the social aspect is also , by his theory , a perceivable experience . I mean , when we understand something socially , this is something that can only be understood by the senses . it is very tricky to refute thought

[@andystitt3887]

God is the one mind that we’re all connected with

[@williamparrish2436]

Exactly.

[@thomson2740]

How?

[@williamparrish2436]

@@thomson2740 Because he is the dreamer, and we are the witnesses of his dream

[@thomson2740]

@@williamparrish2436 What is God dreaming of a person with Dementia?

[@thomson2740]

Guys . World is created so we are . We are observing outside world with our receptors / sensors. Thats all !!

[@williamparrish2436]

You haven't really thought about the problem. That much is obvious.

[@thomson2740]

@@williamparrish2436 There is no problem. He was an anti materialist trying to prove the existence of God with an absurd theory. No difference than flat earthers.

[@andystitt3887]

Does this work without God?

[@williamparrish2436]

It does, and its either called solipsism or it leans towards a thought that there is a substratum of consciousness that pervades all living things.

[@felipeterra3758]

god always is a good solution

[@sertacg8433]

i call that an easy solution, which makes people not think. Even Though it could be the answer you should think other answers, that's the philosophy

[@bosphon]

Felipe Terra And i would call it another false but effective solution to be relieved, or to justify ur life

[@sertacg8433]

Yes, at some point it seems pointless to chase answerless question

[@williamparrish2436]

I literally believe something similar. God is dreaming. And we are the eyes of God in the dream. Even if we weren't here to be God's eyes, he would still be dreaming of himself. But wonderfully, God has many eyes. We call them living things.

[@thomson2740]

What is God dreaming of when you see hallucinations under LSD ?

[@prikarsartam]

Immaterial immaterialism

[@wfdy8333]

Mind blown lol

[@safwenchaieb2915]

his theory is not true because if it is true why he wrote it without sureness about existing of humanity who gonna read his phylosphie :D

[@steliosmitr8245]

Are you joking?

[@williamparrish2436]

You can't prove anyone exists outside of yourself. But you can see the effects of your actions on other people. Whether they are NPCs or not you still have to interact with them. All the better that you choose how they interact with you.

[@yeungeddie]

Hiiiii

[@thomson2740]

What is God's purpose in a mind of a person with Schizophrenia?

[@thomson2740]

Accordimg to bible the world is created and beings are created with flesh. Very interesting bishop. How can a Christian be an anti creationist?

[@DeceasedSpider]

hsr fans are insane

[@trombone7]

Any fresh analysis that ends with "because god . . . " is neither fresh nor analysis.

[@EGarrett01]

...and now I see why I never heard of this philosopher before.

[@BlueSky-md2vo]

Why?

[@EGarrett01]

If you don't already know...

[@robertparker5347]

And yet one of the world's top universities is named after him

[@EGarrett01]

@@robertparker5347 If you think that makes his philosophy valid, then you have poor thinking skills just like he did.

[@EGarrett01]

@@robertparker5347 ...and the reason it was named after him is because they liked his quote that empire should expand West, which is of course a banal statement.

[@nathaaaaaa]

It's like as if god keeps the chunks loaded

[@Chuuyasboner]

DR RATIO???

[@TheGuiltsOfUs]

Spinoza > Berkeley

[@Vodriorap]

deja de hablar raro que no entiendo nada

[@heristyono4755]

" And what is the worldly life except the enjoyment of delusion." Quran, 57:20

[@AshishGupta-ql9lq]

BS